Union P. R. Co. v. Marston
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error to the district court for Buffalo county. Tried below before Hamer, J. Defendant in error, having accepted the shipping receipt and brought suit upon it, was bound by its terms. (Whit-worth v. R. Co., 87 N. Y., 413; Carsure v. Harris, 4 G. Greene [la.], 516 ;• Hutchinson, Carriers, secs. 240,241, 243, 248, 265.) As the testimony shows that the loss did not occur on defendant in error’s line, it is not liable. (Jenneson v. JR. Co., 5 Pa.
Read the full summary
Error to the district court for Buffalo county. Tried below before Hamer, J. Defendant in error, having accepted the shipping receipt and brought suit upon it, was bound by its terms. (Whit-worth v. R. Co., 87 N. Y., 413; Carsure v. Harris, 4 G. Greene [la.], 516 ;• Hutchinson, Carriers, secs. 240,241, 243, 248, 265.) As the testimony shows that the loss did not occur on defendant in error’s line, it is not liable. (Jenneson v. JR. Co., 5 Pa. L. J. Rep., 409; Morse v. Brainerd, 41 Vt., 550; Burroughs v. JR. Co., 100 Mass., 26.) Defendant in error, as a connecting line, had a right to rely…
1Opinion of the Court
Cobb, Ch. J.
The plaintiff below alleged that the defendant is a railway corporation under the laws of the United States, doing business in this state as a common carrier of freight and passengers; that on December 30, 1885, by itself and its duly authorized agent, it received at Cambridge, Illinois, for transportation to Kearney, Nebraska, one hard coal base *243burner stove of the value of $40, and thereby agreed, in consideration of $1.52 per hundred weight, to safely transport and deliver the same to the plaintiff at Kearney. That no part of said agreement was in writing, but that the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bostwick v. . Baltimore and Ohio R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1871
3Cited by3 opinions
- St. Joseph & Grand Island Railroad v. PalmerNebraska Supreme Court · 1893
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. TwissNebraska Supreme Court · 1892
- Fremont, Elkhorn & Missouri Valley Railroad v. WatersNebraska Supreme Court · 1897